Re: [Synoptic-L] Hypothetical M Source
- Brian Tucker wrote:
>Less tendentiously, the "M" material is more Judaic than the Mt material.
> 5. The historical value of M is little because it does not contain much
> authentic teaching of Jesus? Mason wrote (regrettably) that the contents
> of M should be treated cautiously because it has suffered adulteration
> from Judaism. (Sayings, 26) What is that all about?
Mason's implied pattern is a Judaic period (because they were Jews), a
development toward nonJudaism, and an re-"adulteration" by Judaism. A
development from Judaism to less Judaism, which we already know about, is
>Why a document at all? If Matthew was indeed an eye-witness and
> 6. Was M a single or a composite document? My understanding is that it
> was not a single document.
participant, he would have his own memories. Where is common sense in all